Monday, December 31, 2007

Attacks On Christians Increasing

Reading my headline, from what country do you think I am referring to? Do you think I refer to China and its recent attacks and jailings of Christians who do not worship the state mandated/sanctioned religion? Do you think I am going to speak of a Muslim governed country where the practice of any other religion is done only under threat of death. If Christians, or Muslim converts to Christianity, are caught by the Muslim Police, they are put to death.

No. My title refers to a recent news article in the ... Fort Worth CBS 11 website.

Yep. Expect to see more like this in the future...
A passenger on a Fort Worth bus says the T. Bus Service discriminated against her religion.

Christine Lutz says she was reading her Bible to her children when the bus driver asked her to stop or get off the bus.

Lutz, a Seventh Day Adventist, and her children were on their way to church.

"She then said, 'Well I don't think this is the place or the time to do so.' And I said, 'Oh, but it's the perfect time and the perfect place since it is our Sabbath and it is the time with the Lord and therefore I'm going to continue.' And I continued," she explained.

Then, a TRE supervisor came on board. Lutz also told him that she would not stop reading. She and her family were escorted off the bus.
Now, it that doesn't quite shock you enough (which it should make you furious!), then the statements by a Texas state Representative ought to make you grab your guns to defend your life, liberties and freedom of religion.
"Anyone who is loud will be asked to be quiet," said representative Joan Hunter. "That is a standard policy across country in the transit industry."

It doesn't matter what is said, the T has a policy of no loud or abusive behavior.

"It's only if the other passengers will complain, or it's obviously so loud it's distracting the operator, that we will ask them to stop," Hunter explained.
Was there an indication that she was loud? Was she reading LOUDLY to her children? If so, one must ask, why would she? Why would a mother who is sitting next to her kids read LOUDLY? She wouldn't of course unless she wants to bursts her kid's eardrums. So, that leave the second reason that her reading from the bible was an abusive behavior.

Question. Why is a state rep coming to the rescue of a local transit administration and making accusations against this mother of two?

Reading out loud from the bible now is considered abusive behavior. No question. It is a statement. Christians have been under attack for over a decade now. They have been attacking our holidays and any expression of our holy days. Now, they attack our freedom to read.

If you have had problems agreeing with those who say that Christians or Christmas has been under attack, then please explain this story to me.

Illegal to save your own music now???

from Washington Post:

"Now, in an unusual case in which an Arizona recipient of an RIAA letter has fought back in court rather than write a check to avoid hefty legal fees, the industry is taking its argument against music sharing one step further: In legal documents in its federal case against Jeffrey Howell, a Scottsdale, Ariz., man who kept a collection of about 2,000 music recordings on his personal computer, the industry maintains that it is illegal for someone who has legally purchased a CD to transfer that music into his computer.

The industry's lawyer in the case, Ira Schwartz, argues in a brief filed earlier this month that the MP3 files Howell made on his computer from legally bought CDs are "unauthorized copies" of copyrighted recordings."

... wow. I believe this will completely backfire on the music industry. This will only spur more animosity towards them drawing more people to do things illegally so as to not allow the flow of their money to these music nazis.

It has been long legal standing that people are allowed to save media for personal use. Recorded video from tv is what started this. Big Media sued when VCRs came out saying that people could not record and save publicly broadcasted television shows. They were thrown out with their long tails between their legs. If you were to buy a show on a DVD, why couldn't you save it to your media center? That is the purpose of media centers. It has also been long standing legal practice that people are allowed to make backup copies of software they purchase.

So, for Big Music to now claim that it is illegal for people to save their music files to digital format is wholly illogical. If this was the case, then what would be the point of ipods, portable media players, mp3 phones and the like?

I think Big Music has now gone far beyond reality and have jumped off the edge. Their actions will only lead people to seek backlashes against them. No matter how this turns out, Big Music will now be seen as the Evil in the nation. If they win their case, then things will turn out much worse for Big Music.

UPDATE (12/31/07): From Fox
Schwartz is a partner in DeConcini McDonald Yetwin & Lacy, the family firm of former Sen. Dennis DeConcini, R-Ariz.

"It is undisputed that Defendant possessed unauthorized copies of Plaintiffs' copyrighted sound recordings on his computer," the brief states. "Virtually all of the sound recordings on Exhibit B are in the '.mp3' format. ... Defendant admitted that he converted these sound recordings from their original format to the .mp3 format for his and his wife's use. ... Once Defendant converted Plaintiffs' recording into the compressed .mp3 format and they are in his shared folder, they are no longer the authorized copies distributed by Plaintiffs."

The RIAA's own Web site is more conciliatory, but implies that the organization reserves the right to go after music "rippers" should it change its mind.

"If you make unauthorized copies of copyrighted music recordings ... you could be held legally liable for thousands of dollars in damages," it plainly states before adding that "transferring a copy onto your computer hard drive or your portable music player won't usually raise concerns so long as the copy is made from an authorized original CD that you legitimately own [or] the copy is just for your personal use."

However, Schwartz isn't the only RIAA bigwig who's recently implied that those concerns may be raised more often.

Copying a song you've paid for in CD form is "a nice way of saying 'steals just one copy,'" Sony BMG top lawyer Jennifer Pariser testified during cross-examination in the Jammie Thomas case in early October.
Are you mad yet? What about ripping a vinyl record or cassette tape to MP3?? Yep, according to these nazis, you are stealing. Are you mad yet?

Monday, December 24, 2007

Send The Troops a Holiday Message

Please send the troops a blessing of hope and love.
And thank them for their service and sacrifice.

Click here to send your message...

from America Supports

Walkers In A Winter Wonderland

From YouTube a surprisingly Christmas friendly message:

Sunday, December 23, 2007

Huckabee Gets Schooled By 7-year Old

From the marvelous Ace via Ace of Spades...

On the stump in Iowa.

“Who is your favorite author?” Aleya Deatsch, 7, of West Des Moines asked Mr. Huckabee in one of those posing-like-a-shopping-mall-Santa moments.

Mr. Huckabee paused, then said his favorite author was Dr. Seuss.

In an interview afterward with the news media, Aleya said she was somewhat surprised. She thought the candidate would be reading at a higher level.

“My favorite author is C. S. Lewis,” she said.

Schooled by a seven year old. That's gonna leave a mark.

hahahahahahaaa. Again, politicians playing up to their audience. How shallow can you get. Can we please get some really honest politicians? Sad to say, the honest ones have been run out of town. Tancredo and Hunter. I would like to see J.C Watts run or at least hold a Cabinet position.

Thursday, December 20, 2007

English Archbishop says nativity is a legend

From The Telegraph we have a story from the BBC about how Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, (whatever that means) tells the Telegraph that the story of the nativity scene is nothing but a legend. He states that the story probably did not happen because there is only one account of this event in the bible. As if this matters to one who is supposed to believe in GOD and the Bible as the inspired, breathed word of GOD.

Is there not one account of the flood? Is there not one account of the creation of the world, but yet here we are.

Is this man of supposed higher learning saying that just because there are more than one account of Jesus' death on the cross that that event is more believable than another event that is only recorded one time?
He argued that Christmas cards which showed the Virgin Mary cradling the baby Jesus, flanked by shepherds and wise men, were misleading. As for the scenes that depicted snow falling in Bethlehem, the Archbishop said the chance of this was "very unlikely".
You know, I got no problem with that. For one thing, no, it probably did not snow in Bethlehem during his birth. And who in their right mind takes theology from Christmas cards!?!!?

And, for those who actually read the Bible, to expect that all those that visited the baby Jesus following his birth all visited him on the same day is also not logical or even believed by most Christians. To point it out in this piece only goes to attack Christians and their faith as being nothing but ignorant.

And if that was not bad enough, the BBC interviewer felt that the proper opposing viewpoint could only have been had by.... none other than.... a comedian.
His comments came during an interview on BBC Radio 5 Live with Simon Mayo yesterday. Later on in the show, the Archbishop was challenged by fellow guest Ricky Gervais, the comedian, about the credibility of the Christmas story.

Gervais told Dr Williams he was concerned about "brainwashing" of children who are sent to faith schools at an early age, comparing teaching that God exists to belief in Father Christmas.
But, I am just setting this all up. For the meatiest part of this whole ordeal is the comments section. If you wonder why and how a follower of the Bible could hold some of these views, just read some of these comments:

By Paul:
...the gospels were certainly not written by eye-witnesses. They didn't show up until over a century after the death of Jesus. Paul wrote without any knowledge of the gospels and, in fact, contradicts them. I'm amazed at how little Christians tend to know about their own religion or scriptures.
By Robert Blake:
Well, to prove something doesn't exist is logically inconsistent. It cannot be done. However, consider that outside of the bible, there is no credible evidence that jesus even existed.
By James:
If members of a fringe cult allege a supernatural event occurred, the burden of proof is upon they who make that claim, and not upon the rest of us to disprove it. Christianity, like any religion, began as a fringe cult, and is not magically exempt from common-sense logic. So I'm still waiting for first-person extra-biblical accounts of the star in the east, Herod's infanticide, Jesus's miracles and resurrection, etc. There's plenty such accounts of other more mundane socio-political events at that time, so what's the problem?
By Henry Cave Devine:
The fact of the matter is that Jesus said very little, and the best discussion of what he did say is probably in the 1930's works of Emmet Fox...

The Bible has been so heavily editied and politicized over the past 1,800+ years that who knows what if anything in the remaining text has really to do with Christianity per se... other than to carry out the planning and aspirations of a very few who came more in our time than during the life of Jesus or shortly thereafter.
Here is how one person views Americans. Borst says:
Oh no, here come the Americans, ready to save the souls of the world. Spent 3 months outside Atlanta several years ago, and listened to the airwaves chock full of religous broadcast, with door to door evangelicals pleading with you.
By Maria Joel:
BTW Mary being a virgin was largly a contruct of the early patristic fathers such as Augustine and was mistranslated in lukes gospel.
By maze4muz:
It's a shame what religion has done to us. What a bunch of hogwash.
By Thomas:
Actually, none of the Gospels were written by eyewitnesses. Mark was the earliest, and he created his Gospel based on another person's eyewitness acount. The nativity story is mostly extrabiblical.
By Lata:
Why is everyone in hysterics about a story that was never believable?

Really, grow up.
By Jodie:
What has the Archbishop said that isn't true? He is not questioning the existence of the wisemen, just the embelishments added after 2,000 years. There is no mention in the Bible about the number of wisemen or the idea that they are kings. There is no mention that two are white and one is black (if you don't understand this referrence, try reading the transcript of the interview - what a novel concept). There is no mention of asses or oxen in the Bible. The Bible also doesn't mention the date he was born.
And this is but a small sample. Please people. The fact that they had to stay in an area commonly used for holding oxen and asses, and that they used hay and a manger..... in no way suggests that there might have been animals present with them. Course not.

There is proof of a star that was bright in that part of the sky during the time of Jesus' birth. There is a gargantuan probability that there were shephards about. Would an angel have appeared to them to herald the coming of the King of Kings? God has always gave prior messages to spectacular events that he has planned for mankind and the earth.

Were there magi present during these times? Without a doubt. Could they have learned of the prophecy of a king being born? Yes, these were learned men of prophecy and astronomy. Could God have used non-God believing/non-Israeli/non-Jew/non-Hebrew people to spread his word? He did so numerous times in the bible.

Did Herod exist? Most assuredly. Was there a Bethlehem? Yep.

Then what is the problem here in believing the Bible? The Bible, time and time again, has been proven right. It has been proven right ideologically and archaeologically. The religion based upon its premise is the ONLY religion today that has spurned governments that were built on freedom, peace and love of others. All other religions, based on those who oppose God have all been built on control, domination, hatred and death.

Is it really so hard to believe in good?

Sunday, December 9, 2007

NYC Gives Up On America: Sells Out To Mexico

From another excellent posting from the Digger man:
In the most ridiculous action and statement I've seen in quite awhile by someone who is charged with upholding the law, New York City District Attorney Robert Morgenthau has announced that he is setting up a special "Immigrant Unit". No, it's not what you think it is, it has nothing to do with cracking down on illegal aliens.

This special "Immigrant Unit" will solely focus on claims by immigrants, legal or illegal, of crime against them.

And here comes the most ridiculous statement ever made by a District Attorney. (OK I'm sure there's more ridiculous, but this takes the cake for today at least)

""New York is a city of immigrants, and the United States is a country of immigrants," Morgenthau said. "Everyone who comes here is entitled to the full protection of the law."

Once again, this show how Sanctuary Cities flaunt federal authority, and thumb the noses at the American people who believe laws should be obeyed, only for the hope of keeping the democrat votes flowing.
Morgenthau said his office handles 110,000 cases a year and
one-third of them involve people who don't speak English.
Digger continues:

In 1996 the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act stated that a city cannot make any laws or ordinances that order their workers not to report illegal aliens to authorities. After that Rudy Giuliani challenged that federal law while Mayor of NYC. In the end he lost, but cities like San Francisco and Miami have flaunted this by becoming sanctuary cities for illegal aliens and ordering workers not to report illegal aliens.

Now it seems Mr. Morgenthau has decided to flaunt that law as well.

Digger also calls upon the prosecution of Mr. Morgenthau. Good luck with that. The feds don't even want to touch this issue.

Wednesday, December 5, 2007

A Few Democrats in Senate Save The Universe

From VOA News comes a whopper of a news story:
A U.S. Senate committee has passed landmark legislation aimed at combating global warming by limiting carbon dioxide emissions. The vote was timed to coincide with the U.N. conference on climate change taking place in Bali, Indonesia. VOA's Deborah Tate reports from Capitol Hill.

"We are facing a crisis that will hit our children and our grandchildren the hardest if we do not act now. Not to act would be wrong, cowardly, and irresponsible," said Senator Barbara Boxer, a California Democrat, chairwoman of the committee.

The Democratic-led Senate Environment and Public Works Committee voted 11 to eight, largely along party lines, to send the measure to the full Senate for what supporters hope will be action early next year.
HOLY YEAH. 11 Nazi-Crats have overpowered the 8 pigheads to save the earth from the rest of the humanity. THEY ALONE have sealed the deal that will ensure our kids, who are alive now, can live out the rest of their meager lives knowing that their world was saved by these courageous few.

I am so thankful that these 11 people have decided how the rest of us 300 million peons in the USA are going to save the ENTIRE PLANET. I wonder if these 11 know how thankful the other 4 billion in the world appreciate them for their efforts. Because of these 11's efforts, the rest of the world can go on with their self-important lives as before. They no longer have to resort to living on strict combination of socialist and Stalinist agendas to make themselves feel better about themselves.

So, let us hear a bit about this bill and what it would do to us and our economy just as we are entering into a global war...
The bill would set caps on U.S. greenhouse gas emissions from electric utility, transportation and manufacturing industries beginning in 2012 with the goal of cutting emissions 60 percent by 2050. It would create an incentive system that would give credits to industries that cut pollution. Industries that failed to reduce emissions would be forced to buy credits from others.

But many Republicans oppose the legislation, saying it would increase energy costs and lead to job losses. They argue the measure does not ensure that other nations, particularly China and India, will cut emissions.

"China's emission will continue to accelerate as it builds coal plants and imports jobs from the United States. This will be enormously expensive to households within seven years as electricity prices skyrocket by 35 to 65 percent," said Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma, the top Republican on the committee.

I love you James Inhofe.